For some reason Avanit do not like people checking out their list of evangelists, their calendar of events or their Q&A section by people using a proxy.

I tried a couple of different proxies but no joy.

Re Michael's communication, it seems to me to boil down to "No I cannot confirm anything about Tony before I met him in jail in Cyprus but I like him a lot and I believe his account for that reason and I think it's mean and nasty of you not to believe him too. After all he really might have stroked a white tiger, and nobody can say that he didn't. Er, that's it."

This reference to a "smear campaign" is ridiculous.

What this thread is is a perfect opportunity for Tony to step up to the plate and provide proof that his incredible story is fact and not fiction and all he has done is be evasive.

As for the other evangelists at Avanti, they have conducted a perfectly good smear campaign against themselves with all the extremely serious information that they have made available on the Avanti website and in various interviews.

What the people arguing TA's case do not seam to realize is that the story of a man who went to prison in Cyprus for stealing/fraud then came to england, became a christian, went to prison again for a hit and run and then started a ministry is not particularly amazing.

These facts have been verified but on those facts alone they would not get bookings around the world or sell hundreds of thousands of books.

Three time kung fu world champion
18 year old bodygaurd to the Saudi Ambassador to England and Cyprus.

These facts remain unverified and in my opinion the most crucial , these are the facts that sell the book and obtain the interest to get bookings around the world.

When I met TA he was as he has been described , very humble and pleasant.
This however has never been about being a nice guy or bad guy, it is about making false claims or not.

What he also stated with regards to my satisfaction with his answers at our meeting is also correct.
I was/am satisfied with the answers i obtained, the reason i met with TA was to obtain in his words some confirmations from the book so there could no longer be any missinterpretations with anything i was investigating for example: much time was spent trying to find out if Al Caponi was in prison at the same time with TA, at the meeting TA confirm to me that this was the wrong Al Caponi and there are many others.

I asked TA if he was the bodyguard to the Saudi Ambassador, he said yes, I ask if he was 18 at the time, he said yes.
No grey areas, no missinterpretations
This can now be verified or disproven.

I asked TA if he was the bodyguard to the Saudi Ambassador, he said yes, I ask if he was 18 at the time, he said yes.
No grey areas, no missinterpretations
This can now be verified or disproven.

Disproves itself. I mean, really.

Your point is good, however. He cannot now claim to be misinterpreted or misrepresented. He has committed himself to a preposterous claim.

Would the Saudi Embassy in London be able to clarify this? A non-Saudi teenage bodyguard who kills people in pitched gun battles is the sort of character a diplomat would be likely to remember. He will probably claim that they deny the story due to the top secret, international man of mystery nature of his bodyguard work.

What the people arguing TA's case do not seam to realize is that the story of a man who went to prison in Cyprus for stealing/fraud then came to england, became a christian, went to prison again for a hit and run and then started a ministry is not particularly amazing.

These facts have been verified but on those facts alone they would not get bookings around the world or sell hundreds of thousands of books.

Three time kung fu world champion
18 year old bodygaurd to the Saudi Ambassador to England and Cyprus.

These facts remain unverified and in my opinion the most crucial , these are the facts that sell the book and obtain the interest to get bookings around the world.

Good point Mr P

I would take it even further and say that the claims of child abuse by a sadistic grandfather, the dying fiancée and many other fantastical elements of the story effectively provide some kind of rationale, or at least contextual understanding, for Tony's crimes that we know are real.

Without the incredible claims about his past, which at this point appear to be fiction, what we have left is simply a man who was jailed for fraud and who subsequently hit a cyclist in his car, left her dying in the road and then conspired with his wife to lie about it to the police.

If Tony cannot provide any proof or evidence to support his more colourful and outlandish claims then all that is left looks extremely unpleasant and dubious.

Email from Malcolm Down the Publisher of Taming the Tiger

Dear Concerned Christian

Many thanks for your email which I have copied to Tony in the hope that he will be able to answer specific questions that I am unable to.

I do not intend to answer every point you raised but can say that during the process of commissioning the book we wrote to several people who have known Tony for a while for character references. These included George Verwer at OM and one of Tony's former pastors. Their feedback did not give us any concern over the authenticity of the story.

The book was written by Angela Little following a series of interviews with Tony. Angela is a good friend and experienced writer who kept in touch during the whole process and shared any concerns she had at the time. Obviously when Publishers decide to publish biographies there are inherent risks as many of the stories in the book cannot be reasonably substantiated. To cover this we have each of our authors sign a legal and binding contract which puts the responsibility of the authenticity of the manuscript firmly with the author. Should a case arise where a legal challenge is made to that authenticity the costs are borne by the author himself so the incentive is very much for the author to tell the truth. To date over the 6 years since the book was first published no such challenge has ever been received. It seems people are happy to condemn Tony and accuse him of being a liar through websites but no one actually is willing to take up their claims through the legal system.

Your accusation regarding the plagarisation of the teaching material needs further clarification. As I was unable to find any reference to it in the thread - perhaps you can give more a specific name and contact email. I know Tony has used material from several sources but that would be true of most teaching books as very little is actually completely original these days. I'm attending Tony's Passion teaching conference on Saturday so it would be useful to know before then.

Finally it would be good to know who you are if you are happy to reveal your identity. It would be useful to know who you are and perhaps meet up over a coffee to discuss your concerns in detail - If you live in the London area why not get across to Westminster on Saturday for the conference so I can introduce you to Tony himself?

My Reply to Malcolm the Publisher

Dear Malcolm,

I hope you are well.

I do not intend to give you my name as I think an authority within the Christian Church should carry the weight of this. Also Tony’s response to the person who says he copied his teaching materials has been to say that he remembers him and that he had a problem with women. I don’t want personal abuse in return for questioning someone in the public eye.

The link on the thread to the person who claims Tony copied his materials is on this page and you can also read into the next pages where the discussion about this continues:

There is a great deal of unresolved questions about Tony. You yourself could suspend further publication until the questions are answered.

For example:

This website entry predates Tony Anthony’s bookhttp://www.shaolin.com/StyleContent.aspx?Style=Snake
Here is a passage from the website:
‘.. Viper consisted of intimidating strikes that could inflict heavy psychological damage by drawing lots of blood without causing life-threatening damage. Its trademark was the tongue strike - two fingers aiming often at arteries and veins. Cobra, in contrast, did not emphasize highly recognizable or showy techniques but rather very serious strikes to nerves and pressure points. Its characteristic hand technique was an open hand with the thumb curled underneath in order to maintain dynamic tension. Python, in addition, relied on the leopard fist for its pinpoint strikes and included grappling techniques..’

Taming the Tiger page 38 has the following:
‘’…. The viper inflicts heavy psychological damage by drawing lots of blood, "Lowsi told me." it's trademark is the tongue strike." He positioned two of my fingers. "Aim at arteries and veins," he said, demonstrating the stabbing technique in the air. Next he took my hand and opened it up curling my thumb underneath." This position keeps a dynamic tension characteristic of the cobra," he said. "the cobra concentrates its strikes on nerves and pressure points." Lowsi went on to explain the way of the python, with its pin point strikes and grappling techniques(pg 38).

Did Lowsi say these words? Malcolm I am personally asking you – does it appear to you that these words have been copied and placed in ‘Lowsi’s’ mouth?

If you can see that the above questions Tony's truthfulness then you should conduct a thorough investigation.Have you met his mother? Why doesn't he contact her?Do you believe it's acceptable to not be able to speak Cantonese after going through all he describes in the book - right through into late teenage years and then winning his last World title at the age of twenty? Tony says he understands more than he speaks. Are you prepared to keep publishing his book on that basis?Where are the major International scandals, related to which Country was behind the attacks and what Nationals were killed, when Tony killed various assailants of the Saudi Ambassador at various times? There is no record of any such attacks and killings is there?

It may cost you money to stop broadcasting this story at this time - but establishing the truth is worth it isn't it?

malcolm.down@authenticmedia.co.uk

Malcolm wrote:

'... Should a case arise where a legal challenge is made ... the costs are borne by the author himself so the incentive is very much for the author to tell the truth. To date over the 6 years since the book was first published no such challenge has ever been received. It seems people are happy to condemn Tony and accuse him of being a liar through websites but no one actually is willing to take up their claims through the legal system.'

If you think individual members of the public shouldn't have to pay to go through legal channels before Malcolm pays attention to questions and takes them seriously - and you've got a serious question you think he should know the answer to, instead of promising answers frm Tony that never come, then you can drop him a line.

'... Should a case arise where a legal challenge is made ... the costs are borne by the author himself so the incentive is very much for the author to tell the truth. To date over the 6 years since the book was first published no such challenge has ever been received. It seems people are happy to condemn Tony and accuse him of being a liar through websites but no one actually is willing to take up their claims through the legal system.'

So, since no one has challenged it 6 years it must be true?

Some twisted logic there, even if I did challenge it, paying for it myself, and won, what compensation would there be for me? Would I get the fees paid for and the cost of the book refunded? It seems anyone challenging it could lose a lot if they lost, but not gain much if they won.

'We have had no direct contact'

I noticed this in Tony's previous email:

'...In your email you mentioned that an "author" accuses me of plagiarised their materials. Well if this is what the person believes then it is strange that we have had no direct contact from the person, and they have chosen to express their complaint on your discussion forum.'

Bigguy1 posted this description of direct contact on 29th Oct 2009:

'..When I first met Tony, he was running children's programs for local churches. He had no theological training and no resources of his own whatsover. He couldn't even write his own book. Angela Little wrote it for him. Then, all of a sudden, he acquires a library of resources which clearly would have taken theological training and decades to build and research. Doesn't this strike you as a bit odd? How could he write all these resources in a few short months, as a children's worker, without experience and theological training?

I will tell you. He acquired my materials through deceit and trickery. He was given the opportunity to use the resources without charge and with permission, as long as acknowledged the fact, and didn't change the content, but he refused on all counts.

When asked how he could justify how he acquired them, and how he could continue using them without permission or acknowledgement, his answer was "I thought about all you wrote before you came along. So, really all you did was write down what I already knew." Sometimes he would argue, quite unbiblically, that "all Christian material belongs to God and is free for any Christian to use if it advances the Kingdom." In the end, his response changed to "we wrote the materials together." And off he trotted into the sunset.

Let me assure everyone who reads this thread: Tony Anthony had absolutely no input into the resources he plagiarised and is currently using.

In the end, and after a long period of time, my board, against my wishes, gave Tony permission. Tony, of course, was thrilled. In God's eyes, though, the offense against his brother had already been committed.

Can I tell you how I felt about Tony's actions towards me, before he was given permission? I felt invaded, plundered, betrayed, cheated, and deceived by Tony. To this day, he remains unrepentent. He has made absolutely no attempt to put right the wrong....'

I do believe there has been direct contact between Tony and the person who accuses him of plagiarising his materials and Tony is not truthful when he says, 'we have had no direct contact from the person'.

This is the same pattern of selective answering of some questions, but not others, without answering any major question conclusively, thoroughly and convincingly. Sad.